The Sri Lankan cabinet on Monday approved the constitutional changes that President Mahinda Rajapaksa wanted to bring about.

The proposed changes are: Removing the two-term limit for a President; diluting the 17th amendment on appointments to high offices with a view to safeguarding the constitutional powers of the President; and introducing the First Past the Post system in a limited way in elections to the local bodies.

The amendments will be introduced on September 7 and voted upon on September 9. The government now has the support of 147 MPs in a House of 224 and, therefore, slightly short of the required two-thirds majority. However, cabinet spokesman Maithripala Sirisena told newspersons that the government would eventually get 160 votes.

Chinese news agency Xinhua described the friendly port call as a first-ever in Burma – also known as Myanmar – by Chinese warships. It comes amid heightened tensions between Beijing and New Delhi, including India's reported suspension of military exchanges with China.

Though the two Asian heavyweights share a disputed border in the Himalayas, the Indian Ocean could become a more serious flashpoint for their overlapping ambitions. Beijing is developing ports around India to help secure Chinese maritime routes while India’s security establishment is debating how best to assume leadership in the Indian Ocean.

“With this particular port of call I don’t think there is anything that needs to be done. Just watch very closely,” says P.K. Ghosh, a senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi and a retired Navy officer. But China, he says, is sending a signal. “The underlying message is a strategic message: ‘Look, we are in the area and we can operate in the region.’ ”

China's 'string of pearls'

In recent years, China has expanded port facilities in countries that border India, including Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Burma. Indian strategists refer to the projects as a “string of pearls” encircling India in its strategic back yard.

Dr. Ghosh points out that the ports are commercial structures, not designed to be naval bases. But, he adds, “if a push comes to a shove, they can definitely use it for a base.”

The Indian Ocean will only grow in importance for both India and China as their interconnectivity with the global economy grows. The Indian Ocean is the Silk Road of the 21st century, moving Gulf oil and African minerals to the world’s two most populous nations.

The securing of the sea lanes – once the province of Great Britain, then the US – could evolve cooperatively, rather than competitively, to include India and China. Indeed, both countries have participated in a global effort to protect ships from pirates off Somalia.

But for India to realize its ambition to be able to project its Navy over a distance to secure economic access abroad, it will need access first to regional ports – some of which are now under Chinese expansion.

“We saw that happen in Sri Lanka. When Delhi slept over Colombo’s invitation to build a new port at Hambantota, China stepped in,” said C. Raja Mohan, the strategic affairs editor of the Indian Express, at a talk given before a packed public audience in New Delhi last month.

India and China: a complicated relationship

Compounding the issue is the wariness in New Delhi about China. While the two Asian giants have found common cause over climate change and expansion of bilateral trade, diplomatic tit-for-tats dating back to the 1962 Chinese invasion continue to hamper better relations.

The two countries failed to resolve their border disputes in the Himalayas earlier this decade, prompting India to beef up border infrastructure in the face of Chinese incursions.

Recently, Beijing denied a visa to an Indian general who planned to join a military delegation to China – reportedly because he oversaw Army operations in Indian-controlled Kashmir. An Indian newspaper reported Saturday that India had responded by suspending military exchanges. When asked by the Associated Press, China said this was news to them while India refused to comment.

Meanwhile, the Indian Express reported Saturday on Page 1 that the state-run People’s Daily posted in a discussion forum an article titled “How likely is China’s launch of a limited war against India?”

While the Indian press plays up Chinese “provocations,” officials in Delhi tread lightly, taking care to avoid direct clashes with Beijing.

India's next steps

But among Indian naval experts, China’s moves have spurred along a debate over how India should assert itself in the Indian Ocean.

During his talk in New Delhi last month, Dr. Mohan argued for a more assertive approach that includes basing agreements and naval assistance to “weaker states of the Indian Ocean littoral.”

“No great power has built a blue-water navy capable of projecting force without physical access and political arrangements for ‘forward presence,’ ” said Mohan. “This would mean creation of arrangements for friendly ports and turnaround facilities in other nations that will increase the range, flexibility, and sustainability of Indian naval operations.”

Mohan says this makes Indian strategists uncomfortable. For decades they have rejected anyone building “foreign bases” in the Indian Ocean – something India itself must now do, Mohan argues.

Ghosh argues against becoming the big brother of the region. In 2008, he helped organize the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium, a forum for talking and cooperation on common issues between the naval chiefs of 28 Indian Ocean nations.

“Initially there was a lot of apprehension in the minds of a lot of countries as to what was the hidden agenda,” says Ghosh.

India, he says, went to great lengths to explain this wasn’t an effort to become big brother but to create a forum with the Indian Navy – the largest in the region – as the “unintrusive fulcrum.”

For now, that’s the right posture for India, argues Ghosh.

“I firmly believe that if you’ve got to carry a big stick, please talk softly,” he says. “I think there are a lot of negativities associated with being visualized as a hegemon.”

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Himal South Asia.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Over a year after the end of the war, the Sri Lankan regime is continuing the politics of confrontation, undermining the possibilities for reconciliation in the post-war period. There remains an urgent need for reconciliation between multiple actors: between the Tamil and Sinhalese communities, polarised by nationalist mobilisation; between the state and minorities who have faced majoritarian discrimination; and between the government and the United Nations, which have become increasingly estranged.

The challenge before Sri Lanka now is whether it can move forward as a genuinely multi-ethnic polity and an accepted member of the international community, particularly when local participation and international support are both vital for the reconstruction and development of the war-ravaged society. Since the end of the brutal conflict 15 months ago, Sri Lanka has also completed two national elections, ensuring the political stability of Mahinda Rajapakse’s government and strengthening his hand. However, the president’s actions on the ground, and his administration’s response to international engagement, would have one believe that the conflict was not over.

In recent weeks, the government has restricted the freedom of movement of NGOs into the north, while extending requirements for Defence Ministry clearance for nationals and journalists to visit the area. Organisations providing psycho-social care have been denied permission to work in the north, with the government’s priority on reconstruction remaining focused exclusively on physical infrastructure, despite the continuing trauma of a war-affected population. This paranoia towards the north is worrying, for an overly security-oriented approach will only further alienate the already-sullen Tamil community. Indeed, any serious approach towards reconciliation needs to begin with demilitarisation, while ensuring democratisation with the full participation of the local population. The roots of the conflict lie in the political grievances of the minorities, which need to be addressed through a political settlement that reforms the majoritarian centralised state through the genuine devolution of power to the provinces and power-sharing at the Centre.

Instead, the government’s current approach is focusing solely on the physical resettlement of those displaced from the Vanni, in the north – over 300,000 people caught in the wrong place in the last phase of the war. Thereafter, it wants to move forward with large development projects, in what seems to be intended to bring in billions of dollars in donor funding. The problem, of course, is that resettlement is not merely about physical return, and must include rehabilitation and the resumption of social and economic daily life. Neither is the current displaced population limited to those who were forced to move during the last phase of the war. Rather, this also includes those northern Muslims who were forcibly evicted by the LTTE from the north as far back as 1990, as well as individuals moved out of military-designated High Security Zones, Sinhalese villagers from border villages, and refugees who have gone to India. The resettlement of such a wide range of people can cause conflict on a range of issues, including access to land and state resources, and requires a sensitive approach to both the different forms of displacement and the common issues that underlie such experiences.

Growing estrangement

Days after the end of the war in May 2009, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visited Sri Lanka, where he made a joint statement with President Rajapakse. Many of the issues outlined in that communiqué have been points of contention over the last year, and might well be at the root of escalating estrangement between the government and the UN.

In the statement, President Rajapakse and Secretary-General Ban agreed to the following:

"the United Nations will continue to provide humanitarian assistance to the IDPs [internally displaced people] now in Vavuniya and Jaffna. The Government will continue to provide access to humanitarian agencies. The Government will expedite the necessary basic and civil infrastructure as well as means of livelihood necessary for the IDPs to resume their normal lives … Sri Lanka reiterated its strongest commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights, in keeping with international human rights standards and Sri Lanka’s international obligations. The Secretary-General underlined the importance of an accountability process for addressing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. The Government will take measures to address those grievances."

Particularly important here was the emphasis on a process of accountability. Reconciliation with its own people, in relation to Sri Lanka’s obligations set by international law, involves tackling the difficult issues surrounding accountability for abuses during the conflict. But the overly militarised approach of the government and the claims, reminiscent of ‘war on terror’ rhetoric, that defeating extremism can justify any cost to civilians, have put the government on a confrontational path with the UN.

This was the context in which Secretary-General Ban announced, on 22 June, that he would appoint a panel to advise him on reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka, and whose advice he expected the government too to take into consideration. However, the very next day Foreign Minister G L Peiris condemned the appointment of the advisory panel, stating that visas would not be issued to the panel’s members to visit Sri Lanka. Wimal Weerawansa, a prominent minister and Sinhalese-nationalist ideologue, organised a protest in front of the UN headquarters, launching a ‘fast unto death’ and blocking the movement of UN staff – both actions that seemed to have the tacit support of the president. Thereafter, President Rajapakse did not accept the subsequent token resignation of Weerawansa, and it was he who personally went to the protest and gave him water – initiating a face-saving retreat from the farcical fast. The fiasco led to Secretary-General Ban, in an unprecedented move, recalling the UN resident coordinator in Sri Lanka, Neil Buhne.

The Sri Lankan government is clearly intent on alienating itself further from the minorities in the country, even as it isolates itself from the international community. These developments can have longer-term consequences for the economy and population. It is only if sections of the Sinhalese voter base – whom alone the president and government seem to care for – take stock of these developments that Sri Lanka could ultimately move onto the true path of reconciliation. One hopes that President Rajapakse will soon realise that the war is over, and that he will reach out to the Tamils and mend fences with the United Nations.

ASaudi employer and his wife, who are accused of torturing a Sri Lankan housemaid by hammering nails into her body, have been arrested in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, officials at the Sri Lankan External Affairs Ministry said Monday.

Saudi Arabian authorities could not be reached immediately for verification. No further details were available.

The two suspects have not been named.

Doctors at a Sri Lankan hospital operated for three hours Friday to remove 18 nails and metal particles allegedly hammered into the arms, legs and forehead of a maid by her Saudi employer.

Dr. Kamal Weeratunga said the surgical team in the southern town of Kamburupitiya pulled nails ranging from about 1 to 3 inches from Lahadapurage Daneris Ariyawathie's body. He said doctors have not yet removed four small metal particles embedded in her muscles.

"She is under heavy antibiotics but in a stable condition," Weeratunga said.

Sri Lankan officials, meanwhile, met with Saudi diplomats in Colombo to urge an investigation into the incident.

"It was cruel treatment, which should be roundly condemned," said L.K. Ruhunuge of the Sri Lanka Bureau of Foreign Employment.

He said the Sri Lanka government has forwarded to Saudi authorities a detailed report on the incident, including statements from Ariyawathie.

Ariyawathie left Sri Lanka on March 25 to work as a housemaid in Riyadh after the bureau registered her as a person obtaining a job from an officially recognized job agency.

She was held down by her employer's wife while the employer hammered the heated nails, Ruhunuge told CNN. She apparently had complained to the couple that she was being overworked, Ruhunuge said.

The nails were hammered into her arms and legs while one was on her forehead, he said.

"Most of the wounds are superficial but five to 10 are somewhat deep," said Dr. Prabath Gajadeera of the Base Hospital. "Luckily, none of the organs is affected. Only nerves and blood vessels are affected."

Ariyawathie, 49, is a mother of two children who were opposed to their mother's journey to Saudi Arabia for work.

Several countries across the Middle East and Asia host significant numbers of migrant domestic workers, ranging from 196,000 in Singapore to about 1.5 million in Saudi Arabia, according to a report published earlier this year by Human Rights Watch.

Many of the domestic workers are poor Asian women from Sri Lanka, Indonesia, India, Bangladesh, the Philippines and Nepal. Widespread abuse has been documented by global human rights groups.

Common complaints include unpaid wages, long working hours with no time for rest and heavy debt burdens from exorbitant recruitment fees, said the Human Rights Watch report.

Isolation and forced confinement contribute to psychological and physical abuse, sexual violence, forced labor, and trafficking, the report said. The abuse often goes unchecked because of a lack of government regulation and protective laws.

Ruhunuge said the registration of the local job agency that placed Ariyawathie has been cancelled.

"We have also asked [them] to pay compensation to the victim," he added. "We want to bring those responsible for justice. We are doing our best in this regard," he said.

He said his office was ready to accompany Ariyawathie to Saudi Arabia to testify if a case is brought against her former employers.

Ariyawathie's dream was to one day return to Sri Lanka and build a house with the money she saved.

"We are looking at the possibility of helping her to do this," Ruhunuge said.

Karu Jayasuriya, deputy leader of the main opposition United National Party, visited Ariyawathie in the hospital and said he was appalled.

"We want the government to raise this issue at the highest levels with the Saudi government. We cannot imagine that such crude and uncivilized things are happening to our workers," he said.

The highlight of foreign secretary Nirupama Rao’s three-day visit to Sri Lanka beginning on Monday would be her trip to Jaffna — the first ever by an Indian foreign secretary in decades. In Jaffna, the heartland of Sri Lankan Tamils, Rao is expected to meet both government officials including the governor and mayor and members of the civil society and academics.

On her way back, Rao would be visiting Kilinochchi, where the administrative headquarters of the Tamil Tigers was located, and Mullaitivu, once the rebels’ military nerve centre. It was near Mullaitivu, on the north-east coast where the final battle between the LTTE and government troops was fought. Her visit would be rounded of witha trip to the east coast town of Trincomalee.

Rao’s visit — to be followed by foreign minister SM Krishna’s Sri Lanka visit in September — to Jaffna and her interaction with non-government actors is being seen as India’s way of reaching out to the community, which has had close, and ancient, links with South India.

India’s non-interference in the final stages of the civil conflict, when the LTTE was surrounded and finally decimated by the army, was interpreted by many in the north as a betrayal. Former Indian envoy to Lanka, Rao’s visit is an attempt to change that view and send across the message that India was against the LTTE but will never abandon the Tamil civilian population.

Accompanied by a team of Indian diplomats, Rao would take stock of the rehabilitation of the 300,000 displaced Tamils. She would also review development projects India is funding in northern districts.

Monday, August 30, 2010

By Seth Klein | Times Colonist.............................................................................................................................................................................................

If the 492 Tamil asylum-seekers who recently arrived by boat are "queue-jumpers," then I guess my parents were too. They came as Vietnam War draft dodgers from the U.S. in 1967.

Like a couple of the Tamil women who just arrived, my mom was pregnant with me. My parents did not seek advance permission from the Canadian government to immigrate. They did not fill out any paperwork before arriving. And they could no more seek permission to leave from their home government than these Tamils could, for what they were doing was, as far as the U.S. was concerned, illegal and would result in my father's arrest.

Of course, that's the thing about being an asylum-seeker -- you don't get into a queue. When you've got to go, you've got to go. My folks didn't even know Montreal, where they landed, was a predominantly French-speaking city.

So they just showed up. The difference, however, was that, in those days, they got landed immigrant status in 20 minutes at the airport. Over the course of the Vietnam War, about 100,000 American war resisters came to Canada (many with less formal education than my folks and thus unlikely to score particularly well under today's immigration point system).

Among the common reactions to the arrival of the MV Sun Sea is the proposition that Canada's allegedly lax immigration laws make us a global sucker -- a target for many of the world's migrants. This is an absurd notion.

World conflicts, environmental disasters and a global economic system that keeps billions impoverished has resulted in millions upon millions of refugees and displaced people. In Pakistan alone, the current flooding has produced upwards of 14 million internally displaced people. Globally, according to the UN, there are over

43 million "forcibly displaced people," of which about 15 million are refugees.

The vast majority of these people are not being absorbed by wealthy countries, but rather internally or by neighbouring poor countries -- the places least able to afford the costs and with the bleakest economic prospects.

The number of refugees accepted by Canada has declined in recent years, and last year we accepted fewer than 20,000 -- just over 0.1 per cent of global refugees. Surely when a few hundred people arrive on our shores, we can afford to treat these people with respect and grant them due process.

The real and much more significant Canadian immigration story of recent years (at least numerically) isn't about refugees. It's about the explosion in temporary foreign workers. The number of temporary foreign workers coming into Canada each year now exceeds 200,000 and surpasses the number of immigrants.

But the Harper government hasn't been sounding the alarm about this. On the contrary, the federal government has been promoting and facilitating the massive growth in this category of migrants.

Why? Because unlike regular immigrants and refugees, these workers are being specifically requested by employers, their indentured status makes them unable to exercise key employment rights and leaves them highly vulnerable to exploitation and unsafe conditions and they are unable to make the same claims to the social and economic rights that Canadians take for granted.

Sri Lanka's cabinet on Monday backed changing the constitution to allow President Mahinda Rajapakse to run for office for a third term, opening the way for a vote in parliament.

Rajapakse, who oversaw the defeat of the Tamil Tiger rebels last year after decades of civil war, has a firm grip on power and has been criticised for crushing dissent and opposition media.

The cabinet approved a proposal to remove the two-term limit for presidents, which would mean Rajapakse could stand again when elections are scheduled in November 2016.

"The cabinet backed a move to amend the constitution," an official at the president's office said, declining to be named.

Rajapakse came to power in 2005 and won a second presidential term in January.

He has enough support in parliament to secure the two-thirds majority required to pass constitutional changes, but any amendment must also to be approved by the Supreme Court.

Several of Rajapakse's family hold key positions within the government, and the island's key aid donors, including the United States and Japan, have pushed him to enact political reform and to share power with minority ethnic Tamils.

Monday, August 30, 2010

By a special correspondent | BBC Sinhala.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Broken, torn buildings tower over the tiny UNHCR tents on the gardens and court yards. Hanging clothes, pots and pans and carry bags scattered around the land show signs of civilian life.

Thirty years of war has taken a lot from the lives of the Mannar farmers and they still await a sense of security.

“Be careful and watch your mouth. The government security forces are vigilant and they do not like us talking to outsiders," my hosts warned.

The alert and watchful eyes of weary soldiers scanned every vehicle passing through the checkpoints.

They are tired but seem to be friendly. Especially after the moment they identify someone as a Sinhalese visitor from the south.

They are eager to share their war stories, explain the fighting and hardship they have undergone in the area. They see themselves still as victors.

'Tragic' civilian life

Civilian life is still a tragedy to many. There is nothing left on the ground for the people who return from the camps where they were interned until recently.

“We left with a tractor full of stuff in 2006 and came home with two shopping bags”, Mr A told me.

When the Tigers retreated, Mr A had to leave his village near Madu Church with his three children and wife and follow the orders of the LTTE.

He managed to escape to the army controlled area in 2009 just before the war ended.

“The Army sent us to Manik farm and we were there for year and two months. We got our land back but the house was razed to the ground” A said.

He lived in Murunkan and was brought up by a Sinhalese woman. Fluent in Sinhala Mr A worked in the south. Now he is labouring for 600 rupees a day.

“We get oil, rice, lentils, flour and sugar. We do not have money to buy vegetables. We feed our kids with a pulp made out of murunga (drums sticks) leaves and flour. Sometimes we go on hunting. We do not have guns and the jungles are full of mines. So we have to live on iguanas and other small animals”.

The story is same for many returnees. Many houses were razed to ground. Some live on tiny tents right next to their ruined houses.

They all have to begin their lives from scratch and according to them the support they need is not readily available.

'Extend the suffering'

“The Government promised us they will build our house, but still they did not do anything” Mr A told me.

According to the reports from the area the government redevelopment plan costs about 650,000 rupees per house but only 325,000 rupees is available.

“The aim is to build non permanent houses and extend the suffering of the Tamils” a prominent Tamil leader told me.

“There is no planning, no consultation from local communities or leaders about resettlements, this is worse than the Tsunami but no one is doing anything to ease the suffering of the people” he added.

“If the government is not able to deliver services then it should allow non governmental agencies to intervene, but the Government is not doing that because they are confiscating land and conducting a so-called resettlement plan with a view to implement colonising projects”.

Near Arippu, Muslims have been resettled and local Tamils show their displeasure saying “Kachal” meaning it is disturbing the peace in the area.

Locals say that displaced Muslims were resettled before the Tamils in the area.

The brilliant glossy colours of the nearby Mahathitha Vihara are an example for resurgence of Buddhist temples in the former strong hold of the LTTE, a symbol that does not sit well with local Tamils.

Constructed and maintained by the military Mahathitha Vihara has two resident monks. According to security service personnel, the former leader of the Hela Urumaya, archaeologist Ellawala Medhananda Thero, has confirmed the historical existence of Mahathitha Vihara.

“Now the Tirukeshwaram Temple is challenging the claim as they say we have built the temple in their land” says a member of the military who is stationed in the temple.

Sinhala road names

The propagation of Buddhist shrines is evident throughout roads I followed to Jaffna. Not only that streets and roads were named after heroic Sri Lankan servicemen.

I saw a road named after Gamini Kularathne – Hasalaka Viraya in Vedithalative. Despite the local civilian population being Tamil, the signs of the road were in Sinhala only.

“The army and navy confiscated lands on the grounds of security and they are trying to wipe out our culture and heritage from the area” a person who wants to remain anonymous told me.

The defeat of the LTTE is bringing more miseries to the already wounded Tamils. Local residents who almost lost everything do not have any energy, political organisation or civil movements to oppose such moves.

“People lack basic goods to sustain their day to day life so they cannot bother about the politics” a leading clergyman in the area told me.

It is apparent that Tamils are forced to accept what the Colombo administration wants but the strong resentment to such impositions inevitably delay the prospects of peace in Sri Lanka.

The government is reconstructing the roads and improving the infrastructure. It is widening the roads and building the bridges to link the South.

Yet bunkers located every 500 meters and the continuous presence of the military give an air of a military state without any bridges to link the communities.

I felt that the watchful eyes of the security personnel and the weary manner of the civilians both ask the same question of how long the guns will remain silent.

There is nothing extraordinary, be it in the local or global context, in appointing military men to diplomatic postings—though the proposed appointment of Major General Shavendra Silva, former General Officer Command of the 58 Division, has caused ripples in some quarters, especially among those aligned to human rights lobbies and some articulate sections of the Tamil diaspora.

The proposed diplomatic appointments include former Navy Commander, Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in the United Kingdom, Major General Prasanna Silva, who commanded the 55 Division during the final Eelam war as the Military Advisor to the Sri Lankan High Commission in UK and Major General Shavendra Silva as Sri Lanka’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations.

Major General Prasanna Silva will succeed former Special Force Commander Brigadier Nirmal Darmaratne, who is currently the Military Advisor of the Sri Lankan High Commission in London. Former military spokesman Major General Prasad Samarasinghe was Brigadier Darmaratne’s predecessor in London.

Meanwhile, the proposed appointment of Shavendra Silva has already been challenged by diaspora lobbies on the grounds of purported “war crimes.”

General Sarath Fonseka’s earlier remarks to the Sunday Leader - which he later retracted - that Gen Shavendra Silva received orders to shoot surrendering Tiger leaders is at the root of “war crimes” charges against Sri Lanka.

“While Nesirky said he wouldn’t comment on hypotheticals, when Inner City Press asked if Ban would have some discretion to not accept credentials when presented, Nesirky said he would look into it.”

“Shavendra Silva is clearly a witness to the war crime events about which Ban has appointed a (stalled) three member panel to advise him. Would appointing him an ambassador give him de facto or de jure diplomatic immunity?” the website asked.Diplomatic postings to military men serves two purposes.

For some, especially for the outgoing military commanders, they are a farewell gift by their civilian political superiors, to spend their retirement in the luxury of diplomatic mansions at state expense. Lt General Rohan Daluwatta, who was the commander of the army from 1996- 1998, was appointed Sri Lankan Ambassador to Brazil after his retirement from military service. His successor Sri Lal Weerasuriya was appointed High Commissioner to Pakistan. Lt General Shantha Kottegoda, who was Gen Sarath Fonseka’s predecessor, succeeded Daluwatta as the Sri Lankan Ambassador in Brazil.

Army Chief of Staff, the late Major General Janaka Perera, who was overlooked by President Chandrika Kumaratunga at the behest of Deputy Defence Minister Anurudda Ratwatte to be promoted commander of the army, was later offered a consolation prize: the post of Sri Lankan High Commissioner in Australia. Janaka Perera’s appointment provoked protests by Diaspora Tamils over his alleged involvement in “war crimes.” Gen Perera however served his full term as the Sri Lankan High Commissioner in Australia and was later appointed our man in Indonesia.

The second category of military men in diplomatic postings include military attaches posted in diplomatic missions to liaise with military agencies in host countries and engage in intelligence missions of suspected LTTE activities. Military Intelligence Officer Captain Nilam whose cover was blown after the millennium city raid was appointed as the military attache‚ in Indonesia. Nilam disappeared at the end of his term and, reportedly, sought asylum in the United States.

An increasing number of military men were posted in diplomatic missions in countries where the LTTE is active after the government decided to engage the overseas activities of the Tamil Tigers.

Military misadventures too

Major General Udaya Perera, the former director operations of the army, was sent to Malaysia as the Deputy Ambassador of the Sri Lankan mission. He had a specific mission: nab the new LTTE leader, Kumaran Pathmanathan alias KP.

Former Head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence, Major General Amal Karunasekara was appointed as the charge de affairs of the proposed Sri Lankan diplomatic mission in Eritrea. His mission was to hunt down LTTE assets in the East African country. Amal Karunasekara was later recalled as the military investigated the killing of the Sunday Leader Editor Lasantha Wickrematunga, who was assasinated when Major General Karunasekara was heading the Directorate of Military Intelligence.

The Eritrean adventure was a flop. Another, Major General Jagath Dias, who commanded the 57 Division during the fourth Eelam war, was appointed Sri Lanka’s Deputy Ambassador of Germany. Jagath Dias’s appointment has now been challenged by a plethora of Tamil Diaspora associations who have filed a petition at the European Court of Human Rights against the Federal Republic of Germany for accepting Gen Dias’s appointment.

Former Air Force Commander and Chief of Defence Staff Air Chief Marshal Donald Perera was, a few months back, appointed Sri Lanka’s maiden ambassador to Israel. Air Marshal Perera waded into troubled waters in an interview with Yedioth Ahronoth, an Israeli newspaper, when he said: “We back Israel’s war on terror.”

He advised Israel how to tame Hamas, drawing lessons from Sri Lanka’s war against Tamil Tigers.

“In case the other side shows it is not interested in a compromise, (Israel) must move on to the military phase with full force. (The government) will have to explain to the citizens that (Israel) is headed for a long and difficult struggle that will exact a heavy price, but at the end of this struggle the country’s situation will be much better,” said the ambassador.

“Once you have the public’s support, you should fight relentlessly until all of the terror hubs are destroyed. There is no going back,” he added. Back home, Air Chief Marshal Perera’s remarks caused ripples in pro Palestinean lobbies. He later wrote to Yedioth Ahronoth to clarify the matter, outlining Sri Lanka’s support for the two-state solution.

Diplomats enjoy immunity from arrest and detention and are not susceptible to litigation and lawsuits under the laws of the host country, as guaranteed by international law and the Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations of 1963. Therefore, it is a fair conjecture that the Diaspora orchestrated hullabaloo over the appointment of Shavendra Silva and other military men is intended to malign the Sri Lankan government and its war effort. But, if history is any guide, as the case of Gen Janaka Perera would tell, the protests would die down after a couple of futile attempts.

Foreign secretary Nirupama Rao’s visit to Sri Lanka this week will be followed by that of Indian Army chief, Gen V.K. Singh, early next month.

The general’s visit will be part of a series of high-level visits that have been pencilled in for the next few months. Also on the anvil are the visits by Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal P.V. Naik and defence secretary Pradeep Kumar, in that order. The Indian Navy chief, Admiral Nirmal Verma, visited Sri Lanka in June.

External affairs minister S.M. Krishna is expected to visit Colombo later this year. His Sri Lankan counterpart, G.L. Peiris, is scheduled to visit India in October for delivering a lecture here, on the margins of which he can be expected to hold consultations with the Indian government on the progress of the decisions arrived at in Lankan president Mahinda Rajapaksa’s visit here in June.

These visits are expected to lay the foundation of a robust framework of bilateral cooperation in the post-LTTE era, in areas such as defence and security cooperation, trade and investment, infrastructure development, people-to-people ties, and rehabilitation of the war-ravaged northern and eastern provinces of Sri Lanka.

Besides an annual defence dialogue, India and Sri Lanka would be looking to step up maritime-security cooperation and increase the level and frequency of defence exchanges.

A proposal on the table is to have more interactions between the middle-level officials in the armed forces of the two countries, so that the future decision-makers are familiarised with the actual state of play in the bilateral relationship.

Monday, August 30, 2010

The Island.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Army Commander Lt. General Jagath Jayasuriya says the Sri Lanka Army is ready to share its experience in defeating the LTTE with SAARC countries.

Lt. Gen. Jayasuriya, the senior officer in charge of all fighting formations deployed in the Vanni during the largest ever combined security forces campaign, says army headquarters had recently received Defence Ministry approval to invite military contingents from the SAARC region.

Addressing the officers and men after declaring open a monument at Minneriya in memory of those who had paid the supreme sacrifice in the battle against terrorism, the Armoured Corps veteran said that other countries too would be given an opportunity to learn from Sri Lanka’s experience.

Nearly 14,000 IDP families will lose their voting rights in the coming local council elections. Campaign for Free and Fair Elections (CaFFE) claim that not a single IDP has been registered three months after the Department of Elections commenced its 2010 voter registry revision and that 14,184 IDP families will lose their chance to vote in the coming local council elections if immediate action is not taken.

“The department commenced the revision on June, 1, 2010. After three months the officials have made dismal progress in the North and the East with less than 10% of the Grama Niladari divisions in the Jaffna District completing the process to date. We must realize that Jaffna district is the better administrated district in the North,” Keerthi Tennakoon, Director CaFFE told Lakbimanews.

He added that at this pace the voter registration revision in Mullativu and Kilinochchi Districts will not be completed in time for the local council election. 20% of Grama Niladari posts in both districts are vacant while Grama Niladaris who are already there are ignorant of the voting process.

“The department of elections cannot keep on extending deadlines for voter registry revision, because there is not much time left for the local council election. Ultimately they will use the 2009 voter registry which is incomplete. A large number of people in the North and East lost their voting rights in the presidential and general elections this year and it will be unfortunate if there is a repeat performance two years after the war has ended”,he said.

The appointment of military personnel as heads of key overseas missions of the country has caused doubts among members of the Foreign Service whether it is a move to militarise the service.

The government has decided to appoint former Navy Commander Wasantha Karannagoda as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner to the UK, Major General Prasanna Silva as the defence attaché to the High Commission in the UK, Major General G.A. Chandrasiri as the Permanent Representative to the Sri Lankan Mission to the UN in New York, and Major General Shavendra Silva as the Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN in New York.

Diplomatic sources, who requested anonymity, told The Sunday Leader that the move to appoint military personnel to key foreign missions was mooted by senior members of the country’s defence establishment.

“The government feels that appointing military men to head the country’s overseas missions would help it respond to various questions posed by the international community, especially the Western world, about the final stages of the war last year,” a diplomatic source said, adding that these military personnel would also be able to show the world how the war was won.

Nevertheless, the question that looms among Foreign Service personnel in the country is how effective these individuals would be when carrying out multilateral diplomacy.

“Diplomacy is a different game and cannot be done by people with guns,” the source noted.

Commander Karannagoda was the chief of the Navy in the security forces’ final battle with the LTTE. Major General Silva during the war was the head of the 58th Brigade, which was instrumental in capturing several former LTTE strongholds including the Mannar Rice Bowl, Nachchikuda, Devil’s Point, Pooneryn, Kilinochchi, Elephant Pass, Vishvamadu and Puthukudirippu.

The appointment of Majors General Chandrasiri and Silva comes in the wake of allegations of human rights and rules of combat violations being leveled against the security forces and the LTTE by the UN.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has appointed a panel of experts to inquire into these allegations and accountability during the final stages of the war last year.

According to External Affairs Ministry sources, the government is looking at breaking the LTTE’s international network while opening an avenue to respond to various questions raised about the final stages on the war by appointing military personnel to head Sri Lankan missions overseas.

However, the country is currently in need of cultivating a strong relationship with the diaspora through its foreign missions.

“A military person would not be able to build a successful relationship with the Tamil Diaspora. The diaspora is not free to build a dialogue with military personnel. Also, career diplomats have wider access while military personnel would have limited access,” a Foreign Service official said.

Explaining further, the official said the response to military personnel by other foreign officers is ‘lower’ than that received by a career diplomat.

“One can be a good military leader, but may not necessarily be a good diplomat,” the Foreign Service official said.

Nevertheless, Government Spokesperson Minister Keheliya Rambukwella said the military personnel decided by the government to be posted into Sri Lankan missions overseas have a proven track record and have delivered the targets set out to them.

“Appointments to foreign missions are the prerogative of the President and military personnel have been appointed to foreign missions in the past as well,” he said.He also said that other Asian countries have appointed military personnel to their diplomatic missions.

When asked if these military personnel who played a role in the security forces final war against the LTTE last year would respond directly to concerns raised about the conduct of the war by the Western nations, Rambukwella said it could be so.

Also, when queried if the appointment of Major General Silva to the UN would have an adverse impact on the inquiry by the UN’s panel of experts into Sri Lanka, the Minister said, “I would think otherwise, they could participate, contribute and make use of their expertise. If there are any allegations made, they could respond.”

According to Rambukwella, all these factors have contributed to the government’s decision to appoint military personnel to its key foreign missions despite the objections raised in some quarters.

Post-war Sri Lanka has now entered the crucial phase of mending relations with the Western world, who have now distanced themselves from the country. The massive task of building these relations based on Sri Lanka’s foreign policy while combating the LTTE’s international network now lies in the hands of military men in the country’s foreign missions.

Numerous reports suggest that Dr. Jayantha Dhanapala had some interesting things to say when he appeared before the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) recently; about aspects relating to the interference of certain States in the internal affairs of other States; about the R2P concept; about the Sri Lankan Armed Forces carrying out a daunting humanitarian operation, saving 300,000 innocent civilians kept as a human shield by the LTTE and thereby preventing a certain ‘holocaust’ (The Daily News, 26 August 2010; The Ministry of Defence (defence.lk), 25 August 2010).

Thereafter, he had said the following too: that there was a need for an international protocol to deal with Armed Forces engaged in fighting terrorism with non-State actors and that ‘many of the Rules of War and International Humanitarian Laws were based on the assumption that the warring parties were conventional armies of states but in Sri Lanka’s case the LTTE had totally disregarded those laws and principles.’

Finally, he seems to have said something that even President Mahinda Rajapaksa or Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa would have been reluctant to claim so openly: that International Humanitarian Laws (IHL) should not apply to Sri Lanka’s war against the LTTE and that a conventional army cannot be bound by international laws in fighting a terrorist organization (The Island, 26 August 2010).

The initial questions that arise here are these: where was Dr. Dhanapala all this time? Is this the same Dr. Dhanapala who, talking about the CFA some years ago, saw light at the end of the tunnel? Is he the one who was accused of trying to appease the LTTE through the P-TOMS? Why did Dr. Dhanapala decide to remain somewhat silent during the last stages of the war? Was there any reason to wait until the war was over for him to argue that IHL did not apply to the conflict in Sri Lanka? Is he coming out so boldly against the LTTE because the LTTE was defeated and destroyed in May 2009? What then of ‘integrity’ of these learned and respected gentlemen who say (or do not say) one thing during times of war, and a completely different thing after the war?

More importantly, what happened to Dr. Dhanapala who delivered the keynote address at a seminar organized by the ICES and the UNDP in November 2007, titled “Sri Lanka as a Member of the UN”? That was a very interesting and informative speech, in which Dr. Dhanapala seemed to have reminded the audience of Article 2(7) of the UN Charter and then stated that “we must also recognize that we have willingly conceded sovereignty by joining several treaties and in these treaties we have got certain obligations that we fulfill.” And then, Dr. Dhanapala said something else too. He said that: “The fact that there is a conflict requires us to maintain the Geneva Conventions and the ICRC is there to help us.”

If so, would Dr. Dhanapala tell us why we were required to maintain the Geneva Conventions in 2007, and why he is arguing now (in 2010, one year after the war) that IHL should not have been applicable?

IHL and the deprived soldier: reforming existing laws

Firstly, the Conventions and Protocols which form the general body of IHL are old. The basic documents, in this regard, are the four 1949 Geneva Conventions (the Geneva Conventions that Dr. Dhanapala referred to in his 2007 keynote address) and the two 1977 Additional Protocols. The nature of armed conflict, especially internal armed conflict, has changed over the years. The conventional soldier is today facing unconventional and sophisticated non-state actors and very dangerous terrorist groups.

It can also be seen that some of the provisions contained in the above mentioned Conventions and Protocols do not adequately cover problems that the conventional soldier might face today. Due to the arduous task that the soldier is faced with, he might even consider these conventions to be of little meaning.

Take Common Article 3 (i.e. common to all of the Geneva Conventions), which states that persons taking no active part in hostilities shall be treated humanely. But practically, the conventional soldier faces a problem here because he cannot easily distinguish between a person who takes part in hostilities and one who does not, if, for example, the person concerned is a potential suicide bomber dressed up as a civilian. Consider for instance the video footage of a female suicide bomber blowing herself up inside Minister Douglas Devananda’s office. Certainly, until the blast took place, no one was able to identify clearly that that woman was there on a suicide mission. Consider then the enormous difficulty that the soldier or policeman would face, especially in conflict areas. Article 3 informs the soldier that if a person is not taking part in hostilities he/she should be treated humanely; but then, how do you know that the man or woman or child approaching him is not a person taking part in hostilities, in the first place?

Take the issue of indiscriminate attacks for instance (‘indiscriminate’ is defined in Article 51(4) of Additional Protocol I concerning protection of victims of international armed conflict). The soldier has to ensure that he does not resort to indiscriminate attacks, and he always needs to distinguish between military and non-military objectives. But practically, if the soldier is facing a group such as the LTTE, there are enormous difficulties here since terrorist groups use homes, hospitals and schools to train terrorists and perpetrate further acts of terrorism. Consider the difficulty that the soldier who has firm intelligence reports to conclude that that home or hospital or school under scrutiny is a military target and one which is used by terrorists.

These examples would suggest that States need to think seriously of reforming certain laws, in a way current difficulties faced by the soldier are taken into account. Importantly, States should also be mindful of the importance of concluding a comprehensive legal framework which covers all aspects of counter-terrorism, especially in an era as this when States face many problems due to terrorism. And in this regard, one part of the argument raised by Dr. Dhanapala contains much truth.

Internal armed conflicts and the application of IHL

However, whatever these problems may be, there should not be any doubt concerning the application of IHL, the Geneva Conventions in particular, in internal armed conflict situations. As the Appeals Chamber of the ICTY held in the Tadic case (1995), IHL should apply to all conflicts, international and internal; some important reasons for such an application being the cruel and protracted nature of such conflicts, the frequency of such conflicts and the importance of human rights protection during conflict situations.

To argue, like Dr. Dhanapala has argued, that the current body of international laws should not apply just because it is inadequate to cover present realities of armed conflict is a very dangerous argument; an argument that no democratic state could ever make. As Antonio Cassese once pointed out, certain rules of conduct of hostilities in international armed conflict have been extended, on a gradual basis, to internal conflicts as well. It is necessary to understand the logic behind this extension; as the ICTY in the Tadic (Interlocutory Appeal) stated, “What is inhumane, and consequently proscribed, in international wars, cannot but be inhumane and inadmissible in civil strife.” It follows then that the humanitarian laws that would be applicable in international armed conflicts should also apply in cases of internal armed conflicts.

It is here that one should also understand that while the present body of IHL has its weaknesses, it still plays a most important humanitarian purpose. The Geneva Conventions, in this regard, play a vital role in ensuring that there is at least some minimum protection of civilians who are trapped in conflict situations. Article 3 (quoted above) of the Geneva Conventions, it has been noted, constitute the ‘minimum yardstick’ applicable to armed conflicts of any nature; as was held by the ICJ (Nicaragua (merits), 1986).

And in this regard, it is vitally important that one approaches this issue not only from the perspective of the soldier, but also from the perspective of the innocent civilian. How preposterous would it be if a State is to argue that such international humanitarian norms do not apply in internal conflicts? What minimum relief would the innocent civilians have? Would the civilian see any difference between the terrorists who deny their basic freedoms and the State which argues that even that ‘minimum yardstick’ is not applicable? This is one of the fundamental reasons why Dr. Dhanapala’s argument is extremely dangerous. It is an argument that is made in order to evade responsibility for the mistakes that soldiers could make. This is also an argument which can be made to perpetrate indiscriminate killings; a course of action that terror groups resort to, not armed forces of a democratic state. This is also the kind of argument that the disgruntled and obnoxious officials of the US State Department can and do make, and certainly not one a distinguished former diplomat of Sri Lanka and the UN could ever make, in all seriousness.

‘Sri Lanka as a Member of the UN’

Ironically, one needs to revisit the title of the 2007 keynote address of Dr. Dhanapala and consider what Sri Lanka’s role as a Member of the UN would be if Sri Lanka is to make the argument that IHL did not apply to the conflict that concluded in May 2009 and that its armed forces were not bound by any international laws; the argument that Dr. Dhanapala has made recently.

President Rajapaksa, it should not be forgotten, has held a different view on this matter, for he has stated in his speeches that the task of his brave soldiers was difficult because they were carrying the gun as well as the Declaration of Human Rights when going into the battlefield. While this may be political rhetoric, undoubtedly, one needs to appreciate the deeper message here; i.e. that the soldiers were mindful of the international norms and standards that had to be followed, of the importance of treating civilians humanely, of the importance of protecting human rights, of the importance of all the international humanitarian obligations that soldiers of a State had to fulfill. That is the correct approach; and to retract now and argue that IHL did not apply to the Sri Lankan conflict would be a disgrace to a country and the brave armed forces which defeated the LTTE.

Sri Lanka, as a Member of the UN, should always maintain that all important moral high ground, however difficult that task would be. Sri Lanka, as a Member of the UN, should still be mindful of former UNSG Kofi Annan’s Report ‘Uniting Against Terrorism’ (A/60/825) in which it is stated that in the fight against terrorism we “must never sacrifice our values and lower our standards to those of the terrorists. International cooperation to fight terrorism must be conducted in full conformity with international law, including the Charter of the United Nations and relevant international conventions and protocols. It is an obligation of States to ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism comply with their obligations under international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law.” (para 112, emphasis added). States Members of the UN resolved to recognize the importance of this message when the General Assembly adopted a resolution titled ‘The UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy’ (A/Res/60/288), on 20 September 2006.

It should also be remembered that even the numerous conventions on the suppression of terrorist acts highlight the importance of the rights, obligations and responsibilities of States and individuals under international law, in particular international humanitarian law (for example, Article 19(1) of the 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings).

One only hopes that the press has misquoted Dr. Dhanapala, and misquoted badly. If not, it is rather alarming to note how Dr. Dhanapala, a former Under-Secretary General of the UN, seems to have forgotten the importance of IHL, and argues that a state should not be bound by international laws when fighting a terrorist organization.

Kalana Senaratne(LL.B, LL.M - University College London), is currently a postgraduate research student at the Faculty of Law, University of Hong Kong.

Agarment sector trade union leader charged yesterday that some garment manufacturers were seeking cheap female labour from the one time battle areas of the north.“Factory workers were leaving due to poor wages, work and living conditions. Most in the north are ignorant of the labour laws and are falling prey,” Anton Marcus, President of the Progressive Free Trade Zone and Apparel Union told the Sunday Times.

“After many years of war, the people in these areas are ignorant of workers rights, wages and so on and are easy prey for the apparel operators. Most of the big names currently touring the north and east are known to be serious violators of labour laws,” Mr. Fernando charged.

He said there was a huge dearth of factory hands at the moment because many were leaving owing to poor wages and working and living conditions. “Therefore the apparel bosses have switched to the north and east where there is widespread unemployment. These people are willing to work for any wage and they care less about the working or living conditions. At the end of the day, these workers will be exploited,” he said.

Meanwhile politicians in the north and east have also begun to frown on the ad-hoc system of recruiting workers from the area. In one case a local MP stopped a group of Kilinochchi girls from being loaded into a bus before they were taken to a factory in Kandy.

TNA politician S. Sritharan said they had no objection to the recruitment but it should be done in a proper manner. “These girls are just loaded on to buses. No one knows where they are heading for. There should be some transparency in the whole issue.

I have taken the matter up with the authorities,” he said.He said that even some security forces personnel were openly assisting in the apparel operators’ campaign to recruit unsuspecting girls.

Lasantha De Silva with Timex Garments admitted they were involved in a recruitment drive in the north and east but said there was no illegality in it.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

The Sunday Leader.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Sri Lanka’s Chief of Immigration has terminated the visa given to Ms. Elizabeth Ogaya who is the Project Co-ordinator of the Human Rights Defenders Protection Programme (HRDPP). Ms. Ogaya, the Kenyan born HR professional is attached to the US-based Non Violence Peace Force (NVPF) in Colombo and was given until the 30th of August to prepare to leave the country. Ms. Ogaya becomes the fourth foreign national to have their visa terminated by the Immigration department from the NVPF organisation.

Florington Asirwatham, the Country Director for NVPF, said that no reason had been given. He was of the view that this cancellation was to do with the general tightening up of visas for NGO’s in the country, as opposed to a direct conflict with the government on the Human Rights Defenders programme, which is still active in the North and East of the island.

Mannaar police recovered the burnt body of a male from the coast of Kaadduppa'l'li along Moor Road in Mannaar Friday informed by residents of the area. The victim, estimated to be around 45 years old, had been beaten to death and set fire to later, police sources said.

Mannaar magistrate conducted the inquest into the death Friday around 1:20 p.m at the place where the body was found.

Directed by the magistrate police handed over the body to Mannaar General Hospital mortuary for post mortem examination and identification.

Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa on Friday secured the two-thirds parliamentary majority he needs to change the constitution after an opposition party with eight legislators pledged its support.

"We will not join the government, but we will support the proposed constitutional amendments," Basheer Segu Dawood, the chairman of the ethnic minority party Sri Lanka Muslim Congress, told Reuters.

The president's United Peoples Freedom Alliance won a sweeping majority in an April parliamentary poll after Rajapaksa's re-election to the presidency three months earlier.

Rajapaksa has already struck a tentative deal to return Sri Lanka to rule by an executive prime minister. That would allow him to by-pass the existing two-term limit as head of state and run the country as prime minister.

With the latest support, Rajapaksa's ruling United People Freedom Alliance (UPFA) can command 154 votes in the 225-seat parliament, giving the president more than the two-thirds majority required for a constitutional change.

The crossovers come as the government and the main opposition United National Party are in discussions to change the constitution and reduce the president's executive powers.

Critics blame the president's strong executive powers under the present constitution for political interference in the judiciary, public service and police, allowing the head of state to manipulate the system as he or she wishes.

Saturday, August 28, 2010

By Master Sgt. Mike Hammond | US Air Force.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Representatives from the U.S., Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Mongolia concluded Operation Pacific Angel-Sri Lanka Aug. 14 through 22 here after providing humanitarian civil engineering and medical aid to people living in the Anuradhapura and Puttalam communities.

Pacific Angel-Sri Lanka medical teams provided primary, dental and optometry care to 4,647 patients in three locations and dispensed 4,462 prescriptions. Included in that total are 1,662 optometry patients and 562 dental patients who recieved medical care. The Pacific Angel optometrists provided 1,448 pairs of eyeglasses, and the dentists performed 78 extractions.

"Together, we were able to provide medical care to more than 4,400 Sri Lankans as well as conduct capacity building seminars in pediatrics and mental health," said Col. (Dr.) David O'Brien, the 13th Air Force surgeon general. "These activities have had an enormous and positive impact on several communities in Sri Lanka. This is an extraordinary accomplishment for all the participants of the Pacific Angel-Sri Lanka mission.

"A great deal of thanks to our Sri Lankan counterparts for their support during this Pacific Angel mission -- we couldn't possibly have been as effective without their support," he said.

Two medical educational programs were also offered, which provided U.S. and Sri Lankan professionals the opportunity to exchange information and practice advanced skills related to mental health and pediatric emergencies.

Following the completion of medical treatment at each site, Pacific Angel members donated the remaining medical supplies to the Cheddikulam Hospital and Puttalam Township.

In addition to the medical care provided during Pacific Angel-Sri Lanka, the Pacific Angel civil engineering teams repaired and refurbished two primary schools, which improved the educational environment for nearly 200 students. The U.S. forces also partnered with the mayor of Puttalam to provide a power generator, lighting and three new computers to the Semandalawa Kanista Vidyalaya school in Puttalam Township.

Pacific Angel is a humanitarian and civic assistance program aimed at improving military and civic cooperation between the U.S. and countries throughout the Asia-Pacific region.

This is the fourth and final iteration of Operation Pacific Angel 2010. Operations were previously conducted in the Philippines in February, Vietnam in May, and Bangladesh in June.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has held discussions with Sri Lanka as part of an Article IV consultation and on the fourth review of the Stand-By Arrangement, approved on July 24, 2009.

The IMF mission said that overall economic conditions were improving, and the economy was likely to show strong growth this year. End-June performance criteria on domestic budget borrowing, reserve money, and net reserves had been met. With budget revenues increasing and expenditure restraint continuing, fiscal performance so far remained consistent with achieving the government’s full-year deficit target of 8% of GDP. Financial sector reforms continued to go forward in line with the program.

However the IMF thought that significant near- and medium-term macroeconomic challenges would need to be addressed, if Sri Lanka was to take full advantage of the current favorable environment. The IMF said:

“First, a fundamental tax reform is needed, and planned, to simplify the existing system, broaden the tax base (including by restricting concessions), spread the tax burden more equitably, and support economic growth, all while boosting the revenue-to-GDP ratio."

"The resulting fiscal space could allow increased public capital spending on reconstruction and infrastructure as well as social spending to support the vulnerable, but it is clear that the country’s large investment needs cannot be met through the government budget alone."

"Private-sector investment will need to play a critical role. To foster this investment, policies will need to be geared toward preserving macroeconomic stability, ensuring external competitiveness, facilitating capital market development, and improving the investment climate, all of which would lay the basis for higher sustainable growth in a post-war environment."

Indian Defence Secretary Pradeep Kumar is to visit Colombo soon to get to know the issues to be taken up at the first annual defence dialogue between the two countries, The Hindu Newspaper reported quoting an Indian Defence Ministry source.

This was after talks in New Delhi between a Sri Lankan delegation led by Minister Basil Rajapaksa and a high powered Indian delegation comprising National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon, Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao and Defence Secretary Pradeep Kumar.

The institutional mechanism of an annual defence dialogue was decided by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa during a meeting in June.

“It is time to look at greater comprehensive cooperation. In this context, we broadly discussed the areas which would be important to focus on in the annual defence dialogue. An earlier visit by the Indian Defence Secretary will help to understand the issues. In the aftermath of the conflict, there is a need for a different defence relationship,” the source said after the high-level India-Sri Lanka talks on Thursday.

He denied that Sri Lanka had approached India for assistance in building the second phase of the Hambantota port. China had undertaken the expansion and modernisation work in the first phase and was understood to have tied up with Sri Lanka for the second phase as well.

India was cautious in its defence ties with Sri Lanka during the conflict and had restricted military assistance to non-lethal aspects such as enhancing the Armed forces' maritime and aerial domain awareness. When Sri Lanka sought arms from other countries including Pakistan, New Delhi enabled Colombo to seal a $300 million armaments deal with its old ally Moscow.

The source said defence was one of the several issues at the table, most of which were a follow-up of decisions taken during Mr. Rajapaksa's recent visit. Both sides also discussed the problems facing fishermen, with India pointing out that killings were unacceptable and that a way had to be found to eliminate this altogether. It was agreed to open channels of communication between fishermen from both countries to understand issues that have sparked violence on the high seas.

Having embarked on building railway infrastructure in Sri Lanka, India has signed most of the contracts and an Export and Import Bank team will shortly complete the arrangements for the $800 million credit for the purpose.

India has completed the hydrological survey of the Kankesanthurai port and will be sending a team to finalise the detailed project report. It is also finalising the tender documents for the modernisation of the Palaly airport.

Sri Lanka said it appreciated the ground covered by India in three months to construct 50,000 houses for the internally displaced people with the pilot project for 1,000 houses set to take off soon.

fair use notice:

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka distributes this material without profit for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.